Fact Check: Gardner statement on pipeline mostly false

In the Colorado Senate race, Democratic Sen. Mark Udall recently voted against fast tracking the Keystone XL pipeline, but said the administration's review process should continue.

His Republican opponent, U.S. Rep. Cory Gardner, has called for swift approval, insisting it would be an economic boon. He said, "We would create thousands of jobs in Colorado, if the Keystone Pipeline were to be built."

Gardner based that statement on an old study that measured the overall impact of the Alberta oil sands on the U.S. economy, not the Keystone XL pipeline specifically. The State Department study cited by the company building the pipeline estimates that the equivalent of 30,000 direct, indirect and induced temporary jobs will be created in states outside the pipeline's projected route.

Though Colorado could see some benefits from being in a state proximate to the pipeline, it is not expected to be a major supplier to the construction. Ian Goodman, who co-wrote a Cornell study of the pipeline, estimated that at most 1,400 additional jobs could be created in Colorado, but more likely it will be less, perhaps closer to 500. The State Department found the pipeline would create 35 permanent jobs and 15 temporary jobs once it went into operation. Politifact rates Gardner's statement Mostly False.

Doubt of global change linked to education

Conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh said that the U.S. is "the leading nation with the highest amount of doubt about the conventional wisdom of climate change."

While he cites an exact figure reported by the MORI study, it doesn't capture the belief of general populations, only those with an Internet connection. Other polls indicate a good proportion of developing countries have higher rates of doubt. But among peers, the U.S. is one of the most -- if not, the most -- skeptical when it comes to believing climate change has human factors.

David Jenkins, president of Conservatives for Responsible Stewardship, said there is no legitimate reason to doubt the severity of climate change. A study from the University of Oklahoma published in 2013 that found a strong link between conservative think tanks and climate change denial books. It also found that people with no scientific training produce a growing number of these books. Nearly 90 percent of the books examined did not go through a peer review process, meaning they were not subjected to scientific scrutiny."

It seems that the debate on the authenticity of global warming and the role played by human activity is largely nonexistent among those who understand the nuances and scientific basis of long-term climate processes. The challenge, rather, appears to be how to effectively communicate this fact to policymakers and a public that continues to mistakenly perceive debate among scientists," a 2009 survey from the University of Illinois found.